Ted Olson a Front-Runner for A.G.
Jan Crawford Greenburg has a post about the top picks to replace Alberto Gonzales:
The White House could announce as early as Wednesday its nominee to replace Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, and former U.S. Solicitor General Theodore Olson has emerged as a leading candidate—despite initial concerns in the administration that he could face a tough confirmation hearing, according to sources close to the process.
Olson would be an excellent, excellent choice. Kate O’Beirne lists some of his positive attributes:
Olson left DOJ in 2004 with his formidable reputation further enhanced. He skillfully served as solicitor general with unquestionable integrity and without a whiff of partisanship. He is widely admired by his peers in the legal community and Senate Democrats would search in vain for a credible legal critic. He is also well known well beyond Washington and conservatives would cheer his nomination.
Absolutely.
The main reason Democrats would oppose him is sourpuss resentment over his involvement in helping Bush fight the legal battle in the 2000 election. Also raised in the bitterly partisan hearings over his nomination to be Solicitor General was his involvement in the “Arkansas Project,” which pro-Hillary forces — relying heavily on the word of admitted liar David Brock — saw as the very nerve center of the “vast right-wing conspiracy” so famously alluded to by Hillary back in the day. More on that here and here at Salon.
But these objections were nonsense then, and remain so now. In any event, they weren’t enough to derail his nomination. Since then, he has performed admirably as Solicitor General — even after his wife Barbara died in the September 11, 2001 terror attacks.
Granted, the Democrats now control the Senate — but they would have a tough time convincing the American public that Olson has some deep dark secret that didn’t emerge in the 2001 hearings . . . and that didn’t prevent him from shining as the nation’s advocate before the Supreme Court.
True to form, the White House is considering wimping out and going with a safer candidate:
On the administration’s short list since Gonzales first disclosed he would be resigning, Olson has all the right credentials. But some officials, including White House Chief of Staff Josh Bolten, had been concerned that he would face stiff opposition from Senate Democrats. Olson was confirmed solicitor general by a razor-thin 51-47 vote in 2001, when Republicans ran the Senate.
. . . .
Bolten contacted Olson the weekend before Gonzales’ resignation to see if he would be considered for the post, sources said. Bolten also spoke with George Terwilliger, a former federal prosecutor who was deputy attorney general in the George H.W. Bush administration . . . .
. . . .
In deciding between Olson and Terwilliger, White House officials are weighing several factors. Olson is considered the stronger and more experienced candidate, but concerns that his confirmation hearing could turn into a partisan brawl have not gone away, sources said.
That’s the strike against Olson: He’s a bigger fight.
Olson’s supporters have argued to Bolten and others that he would actually be less controversial now than at his 2001 hearings, having been well regarded during his stint as solicitor general. Terwilliger’s supporters counter that he’s equally capable–and more easily confirmable in a contentious Senate.
President Bush’s choice could send a signal: How much fight does he have left—or feel like expending—in the remaining 15 months of his administration? Stay tuned.
If George Bush should have learned one thing from the Roberts and Alito nominations — widely considered to be among the few unalloyed successes of his presidency — it is this: it is not that hard to win a confirmation battle with a nominee of true quality. [Void where prohibited; must be 18 years or older to play; pronouncement may not apply to Robert Bork or similar candidates.]
That’s the lesson that Bush should have learned. We’ll know shortly whether he really did.
Olson would be an excellent choice for all the reasons you’ve mentioned. He’d be a good SCOTUS nominee except for his age, but he’s certainly very vigorous now. And if there is a confirmation battle and he’s voted down, then that becomes a perfectly appropriate point for argument in the 2008 elections, both presidential and senatorial — particularly in some close presidential election states, and in states with Democrats who claim to be principled moderates instead of slaves to the Hard Left.
Beldar (bdd5c6) — 9/11/2007 @ 2:19 amI vote for a big, ugly fight with Congress. Since Olson is both ethical and competent, there is no reason to block the nomination.
Having a huge fight with Congress on appointees can only help the Republican cause, assuming that GWB is willing to make it public street fight.
Scott (412f3f) — 9/11/2007 @ 4:20 amWhy not pick the most controversial at every turn. Even the non-controversial choices will be difficult to get past Congress and the partisan. Unless they nominate Lani Gunier, the Dems are going to go after anyone that sits before them. Hell, one of their clowns called General Petraeus a liar to his face yesterday.
JD (f6a000) — 9/11/2007 @ 4:55 amIt’s hard to lose a confirmation fight with a recess appointment.
Kevin Murphy (805c5b) — 9/11/2007 @ 8:25 amI do not want recess appointments. I want the Dems to be forced to start voting down highly qualified people, in a very public manner.
JD (f6a000) — 9/11/2007 @ 9:25 amBoy, I’d sure like to see a Ted Olsen nomination.
Robin Roberts (6c18fd) — 9/11/2007 @ 10:45 amTed Olsen would be a great choice. Is it even possible Bush will make one of these?
Christoph (92b8f7) — 9/11/2007 @ 11:22 amHi, Patterico or DRJ or anyone, would you do me a huge favour?
I’m converted my blog from Blogger to WordPress and among other things, making a new template and choosing what plugins to use.
There are a gazillion recent comment plugins, but yours is by far the best I have ever seen.
Can you, if you get a moment, go into your admin panel under the plugins tab and tell me what recent comment plugin you are using?
In the plugin list the far left side of each plugin has a link to the plugin page.
This would help me out.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 9/11/2007 @ 11:27 amSchumer advanced Terwilliger’s name and he comes out of the Comey-Fitzgerald S.D.N.Y. I’m with Ted. Enough of Schumer’s controlling the DoJ, thank you.
clarice (0b28fc) — 9/11/2007 @ 11:48 amSchumer was a big Janet Reno fan. But then again Schumer would bring us back to the Salem Witch Hunts.
Thomas Jackson (bf83e0) — 9/11/2007 @ 12:21 pmChristoph,
I’m not familiar with that part of the website. You might try to raise it later with Patterico when he’s online.
DRJ (4725f3) — 9/11/2007 @ 1:00 pmOOPS–I goofed, it is not Terwiliger who Schumer is pushing, and who worked in the SDNY–it is Judge Mukasey who is also supposed to be in the running. I am sorry. (5 workman in the house at the same time I’m posting is my excuse.)
clarice (0b28fc) — 9/11/2007 @ 2:42 pmThanks, DRJ, for taking the time to reply.
Christoph (92b8f7) — 9/11/2007 @ 7:11 pmThere’s a report that Sen. Harry Reid vows to block Olson’s confirmation if Bush nominates him. It sounds like this nomination will test Bush’s willingness to fight the Democrats.
DRJ (4725f3) — 9/12/2007 @ 12:22 pm